Poor mrgybe, a legal immigrant that is picked on by the lefties on the forum. Only trouble is that his narratives are built on fantasy. When I first posted the results of the Harvard study, he came back with an immediate riposte:

Quote:

As for the Harvard study...........it referenced immigrants, not illegal immigrants.

the estimate suggests that undocumented immigrantsí net contribution to Medicare is about $2.5 billion. Although undocumented immigrants are probably also underrepresented in the MEPS data, this should have little impact on our findings since Medicare expenditures on their behalf are minimal.

Undocumented immigrants, if I understand this, can't claim Medicare. Now there is lots of back and forth in the literature--non-peer reviewed literature that mrgybe is so fond of by "conservative" organizations like the Heritage Foundation--which argue that there are other costs such as emergency room care that are included. Indeed, an earlier Harvard Study http://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Publication%20Files/09-013_15702a45-fbc3-44d7-be52-477123ee58d0.pdf
reviews the literature and concludes (in part my interpretation) that the study of immigrant economic impacts is in its infancy and the results depend on the assumptions. Yet pretty clearly, immigrants, whether or documented or not, contribute a lot to the economy, assimilate economically in about 15 years, and are not the source of much net income or outflow at the Federal level. A very different conclusion than many of the conservative commentators.

Most of the rest of mrgybe's comments, like usual, are smoke and mirrors. He says he built that.

Fossil fuel companies make easy targets on social and environmental issues and it is tempting to criticize those of us who have made a living working for these companies. But, many, if not all, of us posting on this forum receive direct benefits from the profits of these companies.

Pension plans, including those for state employees and teachers are heavily invested in fossil fuels. Calif state retirement has stock holdings in neary 300 energy companies. The plan is a significant owner of Exxon stock. I was once criticized when a retired teacher overheard my conversation with my broker when purchasing that stock...which was helping to fund her early retirement.

Naw, 9.0. To CB--let me paraphrase movie critic Mick Lasalle, who said, in essence, at his age he is not looking for people who agree with him, but for people who articulate, with passion and conviction, a viewpoint he hasn't considered. I would add in credibility.

I don't own any fossil fuel stocks in my personal holdings because I disagree with their politics, and the lack of integrity with which their trade associations approach issues of public policy. That doesn't mean that I don't value the underlying work, or believe that fossil fuels will play a role in the economy for decades. But ascribing to them some unique aspect of accomplishment and virtue, without bothering to understand other metrics, is what earns my scorn. That and arguments that trace back to questionable credibility--like the Drudge Report, Junk Science, or a failure to even try to skim the Harvard report before playing "gotcha."

By the way, the older Harvard report that I cited rebutted one of my assumptions, which was that immigrants undermined wages for non-immigrants. As those of you who pay attention know, the current immigration policy was largely set by Republicans to assure workers for service and agricultural jobs. The review of studies indicated only mild effects on depressing wages.

Mac...I have no problem with me loosing some of my profits from the ownership of fossil fuel stocks if it means that the actual costs to produce the product are attached to it. But, the pain should be passed around. If the decreased profits affect the viability of defined benefit plans for government employees, this should be felt by the recipients.

I am impressed that you do not invest personally in oil stocks. I don't either. Those investments are in my retirement plan...like so many. I would venture a guess than my retirement portfolio has less energy stocks than a typical state run program.

CB--one of the few things that Jimmy Carter was right about was increasing the price of fossil fuels, slowly, over time, to steer us, with market forces, to the fuels of the future. Guess what industry blocked it.

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forumYou cannot attach files in this forumYou cannot download files in this forum